Saab 9-5 Estate 2000-2004 what are they like?

Saab 9-5 Estate 2000-2004 what are they like?

Author
Discussion

martin mrt

Original Poster:

3,831 posts

208 months

Saturday 20th November 2010
quotequote all
This is a general question really, as I've never really looked or been into them but I'm after a cheap reliable smoker for a year or two and these seem like tremendous value for money, it has to be estate though, saloon is no use for me.

So what's the reliability and running costs like? Not sure about petrol or diesel yet, anything I shod watch out for in particular if I view one?

Are they a Vectra in drag as a friends father told me?

Thanks in advance


Job38

1,971 posts

243 months

Saturday 20th November 2010
quotequote all
I'm no expert and fairly new to SAAB but here goes...

I believe post 2001 cars are much improved. (look for integrated front grille).

With SAAB I'd avoid diesel. Their petrol engines appear much better. The turbos producing surprisingly good performance and economy from a small engine.

They can be expensive if you're unlucky.

My preference would be for a manual Aero - best combination of performance and economy. But - they're more rare than you'd think....

Oh, and at least they're not German!

martin mrt

Original Poster:

3,831 posts

208 months

Saturday 20th November 2010
quotequote all
Thnks for the input, I've been pondering over them all day and I'm still undecided

I've only ever driven German cars and it's hard to buck the trend, I frankly can't see past them

Pablo16v

2,221 posts

204 months

Monday 22nd November 2010
quotequote all
My wife runs a 2004 3.0 TiD 9-5 estate which replaced an A4 Avant as the family wagon. We picked it up in June 2009 for £5k with 82k miles on the clock and it has now covered 101k. Almost all the running costs are listed in my profile with the only failure being the battery just after we bought the car.
The quality of the interior plastics isn't up to the standard of our old A4 but it's well built with no rattles or squeaks and all the electrics still work as they should. The interesting Saab "quirks" are all there (both my wife and I like the logical dash layout) and the seats are extremely comfortable, much more so than the A4. The MPG sit's between 37 & 39 and rises over 40 on a run which isn't bad for a big estate with a V6 diesel engine. It doesn't seem to use any oil between services and my only complaint is the lifespan of tyres. It does like to eat them but that's partly down to my wife who drives with quite a heavy right foot smile
This is our first Saab and the ownership experience to date has been pretty painless.

Edited by Pablo16v on Monday 22 November 13:35

davemac250

4,499 posts

212 months

Monday 22nd November 2010
quotequote all
I have an Estate 02 Aero.

It has been a great car.

Couple of faults, but well known and for the CDI almost a service item.

I am averaging 26mpg - but most of the miles are around time, it has hit 35 on a run.

It gets pushed very hard at times with high speed blats across Germany on a regular basis and carrying building supplies locally.

It does, as mentioned, like to chew the outside of the front tyres, no matter who sets it up.

It is supremely comfortable.

The load bay is bigger than most, but folding the seats can be awkward - well mine are.


carlosvalderrama

198 posts

205 months

Tuesday 23rd November 2010
quotequote all
I can echo the previous post almost exactly. I've got a 2002 250bhp Aero manual estate. Big, quick, comfy, and despite, or maybe because of the quirks I love it to bits. It's brilliant on fuel (compared to my old AMG) too.

Nevertheless it's due a service, a couple of ball joints and some tyres soon, so I might feel the love a bit less.

MonkeyBusiness

4,025 posts

194 months

Tuesday 23rd November 2010
quotequote all
I had a '55 1.9TiD.
Don't agree with the comment above about the diesel engine. I thought my 150 version pulled very well (if abit noisy at times). I also remapped the car which made it very lively.

Comfy, all the toys, and enough space.
Downsides - the build quality wasn't great. Bits of trim would fall off.

aeropilot

36,512 posts

234 months

Tuesday 23rd November 2010
quotequote all
martin mrt said:
So what's the reliability and running costs like? Not sure about petrol or diesel yet, anything I shod watch out for in particular if I view one?
I'd really recommend the 2002-onwards facelift versions over the pre-2001 cars.
And if you want a diesel, then this will be your only option anyway, as there were no diesel versions before the late 2001 facelift.
Personally, the issues with the 3.0Tid and the tractor like 2.2Tid would mean I'd only look at a petrol version from 2002-2004.
If you are a serious diesel buyer, then you need to look at a post 2006 car with the 1.9Tid engine.

martin mrt said:
Are they a Vectra in drag as a friends father told me?
No they arn't a Vectra in drag, although there are some common parts in the brakes and some items of the suspension.

siwil1

1,022 posts

238 months

Wednesday 24th November 2010
quotequote all
Bot my 2001 95 2.3lpt se Estate back in 2007 at 77k miles, 3 1/2 yrs and 42k miles later and apart from one issue with a crank position sensor 2wks after I bot it the car has been faultless. Servicing is the key to keeping these cars on the road and regular oil changes above service stds if you are capable also help.

You will hear of probs re sludge build up on non aero cars but I dropped my sump at 100k and it was still perfect.

If i'm honest the rear suspension is getting a bit tired but the car is used as my commute car and Dog carrier so not really a concern yet.

The aero is a very quick car but tbh mine with 185bhp is adequate for brisk motoring, They are not 0-60 cars but once you learn that the best way to drive is not foot to the floor then they are hard to beat mid range.

I also have an audi A6 avant and the load space in the Saab is much better (larger)

HTH